Playing this game like it was Fire Emblem...

[Cybele]

Maybe it's just a result of 'Video Game Caring Potential' but I find myself playing Campaigns trying my very best not to lose any units. Not just to have more levelled units for the next scenario, or to save gold or whatever, but because I feel responsible for them, I guess. I compulsively reload every time a unit dies and sometimes go back several turns if its the only way to save a unit from dying. Oh, and I tend to name all the unnamed bats, skellies or whatever unit I recruit.
Do I have a problem, or is this common. Strategically, should I grow less attached, and adopt slightly more spam-ish tactics? I know I can make a new elf fighter for a few gold, but I don't want a new one; I want Isõn.

Also: feel free to share your stories of 'leave no man behind' compulsions.

[Pentarctagon]

Oh, and I tend to name all the unnamed bats, skellies or whatever unit I recruit.

i know someone else who does something like this, actually, so your definitely not alone in doing that .

[Konkonar]

Yes, I've done this too, but have seen my error. You shouldn't go back turns to save a unit for this leadS to bad gameplay. Even getting attached to one unit can be dangerous. Also units are expendable, elves are a dime(168) a dozon. Don't name units this just makes you attached to them. You can't succeed if you keep going back turns. This doesn't mean you shouldn't protect and preserve units though.

[Velensk]

Sounds like unless you do a lot of save loading it would make it hard to get through most campaigns on any level other than easy. It also sounds like it would be incredibly frustrating. It also sounds like you'd have a very hard time getting into multiplayer.

What you 'should' do is something only you can determin. If you can strategically set yourself up so that you will not lose any units that is best, but even if you do that the way you play will require you to start over with any burst of bad luck and in some campaigns it will be nigh impossible to create situations where you are unlikely to lose any units (I'd like to see anyone beat the first level of northern rebirth without losing a unit).

If it gives you a kick to go through without losing any units then simply measure how much that is worth to you against how frustrating it is to start over every time a unit dies.

A note of caution: The tendancy to save load (as in going back a turn to try to get the dice to come up a certain way) is bad for your skill. It teaches you that you can rely on more risky tactics and get away with it. It also gives you a sense of invulnerability that will hurt you in multiplayer if you ever decide to take yourself to that arena.

Personally I think that it would probably make the game more enjoyable if you break yourself of that. That style is fine (even encouraged) in fire emblem where each and every piece is a character you know and related too. Wesnoth is not Fire Emblem and if you are playing a harder campaign it will become very frustrating/boring to keep loading saves to prevent any loses.

[Aethaeryn]

Sounds like unless you do a lot of save loading it would make it hard to get through most campaigns on any level other than easy. It also sounds like it would be incredibly frustrating. It also sounds like you'd have a very hard time getting into multiplayer.

Actually, I think the solution is to play multiplayer. You don't even need to play against humans if that's not your cup of tea, there's plenty of survivals out there (referring, of course, to cooperative-against-AI and not Survival Xtreme). You'll get used to not saveloading if you play enough MP where you can't reload.

[Cybele]

Sounds like unless you do a lot of save loading it would make it hard to get through most campaigns on any level other than easy. It also sounds like it would be incredibly frustrating. It also sounds like you'd have a very hard time getting into multiplayer.

Actually, I think the solution is to play multiplayer. You don't even need to play against humans if that's not your cup of tea, there's plenty of survivals out there (referring, of course, to cooperative-against-AI and not Survival Xtreme). You'll get used to not saveloading if you play enough MP where you can't reload.

Actually, I do play multiplayer on occasion, and in those cases I can be a bit more sparing with my army. In fact, one of my failings was focusing too much on an orc grunt spam before I realized that I need to vary it more than i had been, and not sacrifice units so freely. I guess the difference is that in campaign, you have recurring battles over a developed plot, so you have more time to spend with each unit. And yes, it can be frustrating. Eventually, I'll probably break the habit.

My next issue (related) is that on the first scenario for HttT, where you're supposed to flee, I find myself staying to fight until the very last turn. I just don't feel right leaving the elves to their doom.
On easy, with a bit of luck, I can have two of the leaders wiped, and the odds planted firmly with Chantal and the Lord winning the day.

yay...

[Aethaeryn]

My next issue (related) is that on the first scenario for HttT, where you're supposed to flee, I find myself staying to fight until the very last turn. I just don't feel right leaving the elves to their doom.

That's actually how you should be playing it... even on expert, when you have no chance of actually winning. A post I read a long time ago equated the first scenario of HttT with free experience if you play it right. To rush through means you give up on a few potential promotions. You should care about most units, too, but don't be afraid to have some units (a type you don't like, a really cheap type, or a unit with bad traits) die to save the better ones: for the greater good.

A rule of thumb: if you're never going to recall him (or her) again, their life doesn't matter. Have them die with honor and glory rather than in obscurity years later, after being the bench-warmer never recalled again.

[Anonymissimus]

For every unit that I recruit I decide wether I want to treat it as cannon fodder or as valuable. Cannon fodder is recruited in most scenarios explicitely to die. Sometimes cannon fodder survives and gets enough experience to be considered valuable. Loosing any valuable unit is very likely to make me replay the whole scenario. All non-level 1's or loyals are valuable.

E.g. on HttT Valley of Death on HARD I had about half as many cannon fodder (mainly thieves) as valuable units. One time I lost a knight, the first valuable unit during that course of the campaign, but decided to accept that since I had already played the scenario quite well. I managed to loose only cannon fodder during the other trial. Of course, that requires advanced tactics considering possible moves thoroughly in every turn. Needs a lot of time to play, too.
The ultimate challenge is "Mal Ravanal's Capital" in EI, since loosing any single unit means loosing a knight, too.^^

[silent]

For every unit that I recruit I decide wether I want to treat it as cannon fodder or as valuable. Cannon fodder is recruited in most scenarios explicitely to die. Sometimes cannon fodder survives and gets enough experience to be considered valuable. Loosing any valuable unit is very likely to make me replay the whole scenario. All non-level 1's or loyals are valuable.

E.g. on HttT Valley of Death on HARD I had about half as many cannon fodder (mainly thieves) as valuable units. One time I lost a knight, the first valuable unit during that course of the campaign, but decided to accept that since I had already played the scenario quite well. I managed to loose only cannon fodder during the other trial. Of course, that requires advanced tactics considering possible moves thoroughly in every turn. Needs a lot of time to play, too.
The ultimate challenge is "Mal Ravanal's Capital" in EI, since loosing any single unit means loosing a knight, too.^^

at the risk of giving you a spoiler

you will quickly find out, in one of the hardest ways possible, that this will not be the case, later on in the campaign, when you get to the scenario evacuation

[Caphriel]

I used to fall into the fallacy that all leveled units are not expendable, not because I was attached to my units, but because I was afflicted with a paralyzing fear that I would need them all for the next mission, or some mission later down the line, due to trauma from a couple campaigns that had missions which were a sudden jump in difficulty, requiring me to restart the campaign because I hadn't brought enough experienced units. Because Wesnoth campaigns lack any measuring stick to compare your current performance to, it's easy to worry that you're not doing well enough, and are going to run into a roadblock later requiring a restart. In fact, some of the campaigns pretty much require to you restart after your first time getting to a certain scenario, if you didn't know what was coming (i.e., Legend of Wesmere needing lots of leveled shamans.)

[TheRugi]

I love Fire Emblem, and I did play like that at the beginning in Wesnoth, but Fire Emblem and Wesnoth are very different. In Fire Emblem, units really aren't expendable at all, and in Wesnoth, they really are because you can always make new ones to replace them. Well, losing all the exp invested in a level 3 unit does suck, but you can always do it again. Unlike Fire Emblem. But I'm sure you know all this already.

And also, stop giving your units a name and personality and backstory. It just makes it more depressing when they die. Unless you named him Censored?? McRetard. Or Glenn Beck. Then it's fair game.

Edit: Haha. [censored] is censored? I had no idea.

[TheGreatRings]

Maybe it's just a result of 'Video Game Caring Potential' but I find myself playing Campaigns trying my very best not to lose any units. Not just to have more levelled units for the next scenario, or to save gold or whatever, but because I feel responsible for them, I guess. I compulsively reload every time a unit dies and sometimes go back several turns if its the only way to save a unit from dying. Oh, and I tend to name all the unnamed bats, skellies or whatever unit I recruit.
Do I have a problem, or is this common. Strategically, should I grow less attached, and adopt slightly more spam-ish tactics? I know I can make a new elf fighter for a few gold, but I don't want a new one; I want Isõn.

Also: feel free to share your stories of 'leave no man behind' compulsions.

I accept tactically nessissary losses (I'm not a good enough player to prevent them), but one thing I never do is treat units as canon fodder or suicide them for larger objectives. I don't like to send badly wounded units onto the front line if I can help it. Accordingly, my play style is healer-heavy, and I try to level Mages more or less exclusively to White Mages and then most likely to Mages of Light (the latter being my all-time favorite Wesnoth unit). I also like regen units because they help keep the casualties down, and Rebels/Drakes because of cheap level one healers. So it does influence my playing preferences and style heavily.

[TheGreatRings]

My next issue (related) is that on the first scenario for HttT, where you're supposed to flee, I find myself staying to fight until the very last turn. I just don't feel right leaving the elves to their doom.

That's actually how you should be playing it... even on expert, when you have no chance of actually winning. A post I read a long time ago equated the first scenario of HttT with free experience if you play it right. To rush through means you give up on a few potential promotions. You should care about most units, too, but don't be afraid to have some units (a type you don't like, a really cheap type, or a unit with bad traits) die to save the better ones: for the greater good.

Yes, I usually aim to take out the two northern orcs. I too have issues with leaving the elves to just die, and besides, I found that level too easy sometimes if I just tried to run.

A rule of thumb: if you're never going to recall him (or her) again, their life doesn't matter. Have them die with honor and glory rather than in obscurity years later, after being the bench-warmer never recalled again.

If I'm not going to recall a unit (say its a 14 gold unit that earned two xp, so I won't be spending 20 to recall it) I can just dismiss it to keep my recall list less cluttered. I figure my veterans deserve to go home to their families, even if their combination to the war effort was to take three swings at an orc archer and miss.

[Frogger5]

I get attached to my veterans. When I played HttT I always set up troops just so one could upgrade. But I didn't use them next scenario I saved them all for the last battle (I had about ten thundergaurds). I especially liked my assassin, they're not easy to get.

[LightAlkmst]

Sacrifice of one for the good of the many. (I don't remember who the (mis)quote is from)

Would you prefer losing one or all of your units?